News Intel's Flagship Core i9-12900K 'Alder Lake' Smashes Ryzen 9 5950X in Geekbench

[Eximo]

Then there is the total mismatch of the 5900X vs the 11900K... while costing the same the 5900X has two more cores and four more threads than the 11900K and simply dominates it across the board.

4 cores and 8 threads. 8 cores vs 12. Why it is such an waste over an i7-11700k, a little overclocking and you basically have it.

 

[spongiemaster]

As stated prior, it will all depend on availability in this new market. For over a year 5900X processors were being scalped for $800, 5950X processors were going for $1200, RTX 3080 gpus are selling for double there MSRP at $1600+... I've been reading on site after site how Intel wasn't going to be effected by the "great silicon shortage" because they fab their own stuff, Intel was going to be able to just flood the market with all the processors and GPUs anyone would need. Well, the reality is that Intel's most popular processors are also sold out and are also being scalped for way more than they are worth and pricing them into categories that make no sense. The budget 11400 is being scalped for as much as the 11600K which is priced the same as the 5600X (even though the 5600X has overall better performance). Intel has a full product stack planned but if its unavailable what does it matter that they technically offer something that can't be bought. If you have to pay as much for a budget processor as you would for a mid range processor why in the world would you buy it? Intel has admitted several times that the silicon shortage will continue through 2022. The most popular processors will sell out quickly, will remain extremely hard to find and will only be available at scalpers pricing.

Intel's lower end 11th gen were available from pretty much day one. They were readily available all year until very recently because we are in the back to school buying period. Like a broken record that none of you seem to be able to read and comprehend, the overwhelming majority of this market will be looking for sub $200 CPU's. That's why we are seeing shortages down at the bottom while everything $250 or more is in stock. No parents are buying an 11900k or 5900x for their kid going to college. So let's cut the garbage with what does it matter what Intel releases if Intel can't produce it. Intel has sporadic shortages for a few weeks during peek demand and it's the end of the world. AMD has shortages for 9 months and that's perfectly ok.

Intel has never tried to beat AMD on value. Not sure what the revelation here is that Intel currently isn't a better value at most price points. They don't have to be to outsell AMD, and they don't want to be. Intel has never wanted the stigma of being a value focused discount brand. Once you have that reputation, it is extremely difficult to shed it. Just ask AMD.

 

[spongiemaster]

A large army defeating a small army will only be a footnote in history, a small army defeating a much larger army in a pitched battle will never be forgotten. Its why militaries across the globe still study Alexander the Great's battlefield tactics. Intel with 10 times the R&D budget is expected to have better processors than AMD. The fact that AMD with a fraction of Intel's R&D budget was able to release a generation of processors that dominated Intel is why it was really big news. Intel only made it worse with the release of Rocket Lake which is still outperformed by its Zen 3 counterparts.

Intel and AMD aren't exactly spending their R&D dollars on the same thing. Let's not forget that AMD bailed on the manufacturing side largely because they couldn't afford it any more. Intel is still paying those massive node development costs. AMD is not blind. They are well aware that Intel is still pretty much in a dead heat performance wise on a per core basis despite being on an inferior node so they are continuing to keep the hammer down on the development schedule because the node advantage isn't going to last forever. Intel's architecture development teams are doing fine and have stayed on schedule. It's the manufacturing side that AMD gave up on, that is holding Intel back. As Intel brings themselves back into parity with AMD on the node side (whether through their own fabs or buying everything TSMC can produce), it will become apparent that AMD doesn't have nearly the cpu design lead that some of you think they do.

 

[TerryLaze]

4 cores and 8 threads. 8 cores vs 12. Why it is such an waste over an i7-11700k, a little overclocking and you basically have it.

People are missing the point of the 11900k.
It's not meant for server and workstation loads.
It's meant for businesses, which are Intel's biggest customers, if they are calculating a huge spreadsheet or something like that on the CPU they will still get up to 2 cores running at up to 5.3 for whatever else they need to be doing, instead of all cores running at the all core boost which would be much lower without a full blown overclock.

Here we see what looks like a 5.1 GHz all-core turbo, from three cores to eight cores loaded. This is +300 MHz above TVB when all eight cores are loaded. But the reason why I’m calling this a floating turbo is because it is opportunistic.

What this means is that, if all 8 cores are loaded, TB2 means that it will run at 4.7 GHz. If there is power budget and thermal budget, it will attempt 4.8 GHz. If there is more power budget and thermal budget available, it will go to 4.9 GHz, then 5.0 GHz, then 5.1 GHz. The frequency will float as long as it has enough of those budgets to play with, and it will increase/decrease as necessary. This is important as different instructions cause different amounts of power draw and such.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/16495/intel-rocket-lake-14nm-review-11900k-11700k-11600k/4

 

[Eximo]

I get what TVB is about, but you can do a full blown overclock to get that out of an 11700K, which is what enthusiasts should do. Myself as an enthusiast, bought a locked processor and turned off the power limits. I still get my 5.2Ghz single core and 5.1Ghz dual core without needing a K series chip, and it was the same cost as a 11700K...Slightly slower, but I do have the extra cores when I do something that needs it (probably never, but more cache anyway)

K series and business rarely go hand in hand. Honestly don't think I have ever encountered one. Speed is usually less important than reliability, and there are high clock speed Xeon variants that usually fill this role. And for serious tasks, you find a way to make it multithreaded. Anyone using a spreadsheet at that level is not doing it right, that is when you want to switch to a database.

 

[spongiemaster]

I get what TVB is about, but you can do a full blown overclock to get that out of an 11700K, which is what enthusiasts should do. Myself as an enthusiast, bought a locked processor and turned off the power limits. I still get my 5.2Ghz single core and 5.1Ghz dual core without needing a K series chip, and it was the same cost as a 11700K...Slightly slower, but I do have the extra cores when I do something that needs it (probably never, but more cache anyway)

K series and business rarely go hand in hand. Honestly don't think I have ever encountered one. Speed is usually less important than reliability, and there are high clock speed Xeon variants that usually fill this role. And for serious tasks, you find a way to make it multithreaded. Anyone using a spreadsheet at that level is not doing it right, that is when you want to switch to a database.

The 11900k doesn't really make sense on any level. There isn't enough differentiating it from the 11700k for anyone to go for the 11900k. The only reason to get an 11900k is because you have to have the fastest Intel CPU because for some reason that matters to you.

 

[Redneck5439]

Well I did wrote about the 10400 and 11400 and the likes (10400F and 11400F). Never mentioned a single word about the Core i5 11600K/11700K/11900K and all the rest of the CPU you wrote about it.

The rest is your opinion which is great and I respect that, altough from your post it seems to be focused on whats available in the US, which is also fine but it does not tell the whole market picture.

In other markets which I tend to look (and buy) very often for components, the situation may or not be similar. In any case I still believe that you can't go wrong right now, as I wrote, the performance delta for "similar" product lines is close to each other so anything you pick would be fine. Also considering the CPU alone is not fair, since people upgrading may be able to keep thier motherboard and ram, and so the equation change.

Finally about "the smart money is on Zen 3" I kinda agree up to some extent. But then again if you are not in a hurry and/or your system performs well enough and works without isues for you, then the "smart money" (this time around) may be to just wait. I mean not much of a point to expend money on a platform that wont have any future upgrades.

Once again this is my opinion.

You are correct, I was looking at the US market... other markets may be very different. I also agree that with the exception of the 11900K (which is just "out of place") the performance delta between AMD and Intel has never been closer. You are correct, it is hard to go wrong right now, and if you can wait to build the really "smart money" is to invest in the next generation sockets as both AMD and Intel are now working on sockets with no real upgrade path (AMD may do a Zen 3 refresh but that would be the end of the line for AM4).

 

[Redneck5439]

People are missing the point of the 11900k.
It's not meant for server and workstation loads.
It's meant for businesses, which are Intel's biggest customers, if they are calculating a huge spreadsheet or something like that on the CPU they will still get up to 2 cores running at up to 5.3 for whatever else they need to be doing, instead of all cores running at the all core boost which would be much lower without a full blown overclock.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/16495/intel-rocket-lake-14nm-review-11900k-11700k-11600k/4

Simply put the 11900K makes absolutely no sense in any build. If you absolutely have to have an "Intel Inside" to make you feel warm and fuzzy then it makes much more sense to get a 11700(K) and overclock it. If you are spending $550 on a processor it makes much more sense to buy the one with more cores, more performance and vastly more efficient. The 11900K is a money grab aimed at Intel's extreme fan base that have to have the highest end skew even if it makes no sense.

 

[TerryLaze]

Simply put the 11900K makes absolutely no sense in any build. If you absolutely have to have an "Intel Inside" to make you feel warm and fuzzy then it makes much more sense to get a 11700(K) and overclock it. If you are spending $550 on a processor it makes much more sense to buy the one with more cores, more performance and vastly more efficient. The 11900K is a money grab aimed at Intel's extreme fan base that have to have the highest end skew even if it makes no sense.

If you get an, for example, 5900x and want to run something multithreaded and at the same time something single threaded, I mean why else would you go for so many cores, then the single threaded thing will be limited to 4.1Ghz , overclocking it to 4.8 or whatever the top is for all core will make it much less efficient.
The 5950x is even worse, it has a single core clock of 5,05Ghz so it looks good in single thread benchmarks but if you run all cores it drops to 3.77Ghz so that it looks good for efficiency.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/1621...e-review-5950x-5900x-5800x-and-5700x-tested/8

The amount of people that need a pure workstation CPU (all cores full load all the time) is laughably small and also they already mostly went with custom ARM because that's even more efficient.
I'm not saying that the 11900k is great for everybody, but anybody that does need it gets great benefits from it, same goes for the 5900/5950 of course.

 

[PCWarrior]

You are correct, I was looking at the US market... other markets may be very different. I also agree that with the exception of the 11900K (which is just "out of place") the performance delta between AMD and Intel has never been closer. You are correct, it is hard to go wrong right now, and if you can wait to build the really "smart money" is to invest in the next generation sockets as both AMD and Intel are now working on sockets with no real upgrade path (AMD may do a Zen 3 refresh but that would be the end of the line for AM4).

Well below are the current prices for Intel and AMD cpus

		MSRP	Best price on Amazon/ Newegg/ Best Buy
i5 10400	6C/12T	$182	$165
i5 10600KF	6C/12T	$237 - $247	$199
i5 10600K	6C/12T	$262 - $272	$215
i5 11600K	6C/12T	$262 - $272	$280
i7 10700KF	8C/16T	$349 - $359	$255
i7 10700K	8C/16T	$374 - $384	$270
i7 11700K	8C/16T	$399 - $409	$360
i9 10850K	10C/20T	$453 - $464	$408
i9 10900K	10C/20T	$488 - $499	$489
i9 11900K	8C/16T	$539-$549	$520
R5 2600	6C/12T	$199	$192
R5 3600	6C/12T	$199	$180
R5 3600X	6C/12T	$249	$250
R5 5600G	6C/12T	$259	$259
R5 5600X	6C/12T	$299	$273
R7 3700X	8C/16T	$329	$280
R7 5700G	8C/16T	$359	$359
R7 5800X	8C/16T	$449	$394
R9 3900X	12C/24T	$499	$440
R9 5900X	12C/24T	$549	$500

In terms of value, both Intel and AMD have comparable offerings, but one could argue that ever since the release of Rocketlake, Intel has been consistently offering better value in the critical $150-$400 range. Also don’t forget that before Intel launched Rocket lake (which also saw a massive decrease in the price of Comet lake parts) the 5800X was the only AMD cpu retailing at MSRP ($450). The 5600X was being scalped to $380-$400, the 5900X was going for over $700 and the 5950X was either unobtanium or scalped to over $1100. Intel’s 14nm parts better availability put an end to the scalping, especially of the mid-range to higher end parts. The continuous offers on Comet lake parts such as the 10850K for $380-$400, the 10700K for $300-$320, the 10700 for $260-280, the 10600K for $210-$230 kept the prices of AMD’s 5000 series in check and even forced them to drop more quickly once their availability increased than they would naturally. And yeah the 11400 might be getting scalped but at least scalpers' attention goes there and the rest of the lineup is not being affected. Even now AMD’s only truly good-value option is on the high end with the 5900X that currently retails for $500. And that is arguably due to the pressure from Intel’s offerings as well as the effect of the looming release of Alderlake and the associated wait and see approach by many perspective buyers.

 

[Deleted member 1560910]

It's the same amount of power, 250W was also the PL2 for the 11900k.
Also PL2 should only run for 56sec, running it for an hour means that power limits are lifted which makes the result irrelevant, it's basically like showing overclocking numbers and passing them off as normal numbers.

The 12 the gen will have dark silicone in the form of the fused off AVX wich will mean more surface for the same heat which should result in better thermals.

Zen 3 was already beaten by rocket lake.

Spoiler

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i7-11700k-cpu-review

View: https://i.imgur.com/JAfWaMM.jpg

THats alot of power